Re: [idn] Walid inc. patent news.

[Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine <brunner@nic-naa.net>]

Marc,

> >I understood Dave's proposal to be expert-guided design, an engineering
> >activity.
> 
> yeap.
> 
>
> >You appear to have understood Dave's proposal to be a non-engineering
> >activity.
> 
> no. I did understand well.

and

> - I was just saying that this activity, based on my limited knowledge of 
> ietf, cannot be a working group formal activity per se. this is it. nothing 
> else. Since the ietf, by itself, does not conduct "patent activities". (one 
> can argue differently obviously... ;-)))

Litigation is carried out by litigators.

Patent work is carried out by patent attornies.

Engineering is carried out by engineers.

No process document prevents a working group from seeking guidance by any
expert, in fact, by our very participant nature, a patent attorney may be
a working group participant.

Taking the rest of your note out of order:

> - I was not commenting on the value of the activity. i.e. it may be good or 
> not to do it.

Utility is variably determined. Necessity is process document determined.

> - So in other words, you are free to do it, but not with an official wg 
> hat, but as individuals.

As it was with the co-chairs and the I-D co-author, in their personal
capacities, in the context originally described in this thread.

I'm glad to see Paul's note. It is overdue, but necessary.

Eric